Google has been reticent to say what its broader plans are for bringing Google Fiber to other communities around the US—on Monday, two Wall Street analysts concluded that Google likely wouldn’t bring it to the rest of the country.

Currently, in the Kansas City area, the service comes in three options: a $120 per month package (which includes TV-over-IP and a DVR to go along with it), a $70 per month package (same gigabit speed, minus the TV), and an option to get your house “Google Fiber”-ready at a one-time construction cost of $300 (which can be split up over 12 months)—that will bring 5Mbps, for free, over seven years.

“We’re also planning to connect many public institutions as we build in Austin—schools, hospitals, community centers, etc.—at a gigabit for no charge,” the company added in a corporate blog post on Monday.

Google will be hosting a conference call for reporters on Monday afternoon, and we will update this story once we’ve heard more from the call.

Its too bad that Google fiber will never be feasible in places that have signed laws preventing public funding for internet, specially since some of this rural places have no real alternatives to being gouged.

Awesome news. I am relocating there this summer, likely to the suburbs though. I wonder if they will be rolling out to any of them (initially or otherwise).

If KC is any indication, once they get to the final stages of deployment in the initial zones, they will deploy to suburbs where they're able to reach rights and access agreements with the municipality.

I really hate Austin. Not just because they're getting Google fiber, but also because it's a great progressive city in the middle of a conservative desert.

I'd like to live there or somewhere like there for a lot of reasons, but I really can't bring myself to move to Texas.

So, Google, please shove that fiber up your ass, next. We should be encouraging people to relocate Austin to another state, not cementing it in the middle of a minefield of conservative assholes.

Agreed. I'd much rather live in a state like California, Illinois, or New York, where progressive policies have led to low taxes, low costs of living, little corruption, and non-burdensome amounts of debt / liabilities.

Edit: Sarcasm isn't trolling. My point is that there are plenty of reasons why one should want to move to Texas over one of the states I listed.

Awesome news. I am relocating there this summer, likely to the suburbs though. I wonder if they will be rolling out to any of them (initially or otherwise).

If KC is any indication, once they get to the final stages of deployment in the initial zones, they will deploy to suburbs where they're able to reach rights and access agreements with the municipality.

Like mdt above, I'm near Cedar Park as well. I'm guessing they'll be sticky about all this. They voted down taking part in municipal transportation with Austin, so now the trains and buses pass through Cedar Park, but don't stop there. I'll wave at all the Google data bits as they pass by me on their way from Austin to Leander.

I specially since some of this rural places have no real alternatives to being gouged.

It seems to me that if the current providers are actually gouging it would create a wonderful market opportunity for you or somebody else to come in and start a business providing better service at a lower price.

Awesome news. I am relocating there this summer, likely to the suburbs though. I wonder if they will be rolling out to any of them (initially or otherwise).

If KC is any indication, once they get to the final stages of deployment in the initial zones, they will deploy to suburbs where they're able to reach rights and access agreements with the municipality.

Like mdt above, I'm near Cedar Park as well. I'm guessing they'll be sticky about all this. They voted down taking part in municipal transportation with Austin, so now the trains and buses pass through Cedar Park, but don't stop there. I'll wave at all the Google data bits as they pass by me on their way from Austin to Leander.

I'm in Cedar Park, in spitting distance of the Austin city limits. I hope it makes it here.

Moderation: flagged for troll.

I really hate Austin. Not just because they're getting Google fiber, but also because it's a great progressive city in the middle of a conservative desert.

I'd like to live there or somewhere like there for a lot of reasons, but I really can't bring myself to move to Texas.

So, Google, please shove that fiber up your ass, next. We should be encouraging people to relocate Austin to another state, not cementing it in the middle of a minefield of conservative assholes.

Agreed. I'd much rather live in a state like California, Illinois, or New York, where progressive policies have led to low taxes, low costs of living, little corruption, and non-burdensome amounts of debt / liabilities.

I specially since some of this rural places have no real alternatives to being gouged.

It seems to me that if the current providers are actually gouging it would create a wonderful market opportunity for you or somebody else to come in and start a business providing better service at a lower price.

You are postulating an actual free market where there are low barriers to entry. The telecommunications industry doesn't even passably resemble that, even if you squint at it for a really long time. Try to actually compete w/an entrenched telco and they will bury you in lobbyists and lawsuits until you run out of money.

The only reason Google can get away w/it is because the telcos aren't guaranteed of winning a war of attrition w/them like they are w/any smaller startup.

I specially since some of this rural places have no real alternatives to being gouged.

It seems to me that if the current providers are actually gouging it would create a wonderful market opportunity for you or somebody else to come in and start a business providing better service at a lower price.

You are postulating an actual free market where there are low barriers to entry. The telecommunications industry doesn't even passably resemble that, even if you squint at it for a really long time. Try to actually compete w/an entrenched telco and they will bury you in lobbyists and lawsuits until you run out of money.

On what grounds? I'm not talking about a creating a public entity to compete with a private one, I'm talking about starting a private business. Granted the incumbents could screw up your plans by actually competing with you, but that's not what you said they would do.

Moderation: Content hidden for take moderation complaints to the mods contact form.

markstewart wrote:

voltagesauceq wrote:

Moderation: flagged for troll.

jackstrop wrote:

I really hate Austin. Not just because they're getting Google fiber, but also because it's a great progressive city in the middle of a conservative desert.

I'd like to live there or somewhere like there for a lot of reasons, but I really can't bring myself to move to Texas.

So, Google, please shove that fiber up your ass, next. We should be encouraging people to relocate Austin to another state, not cementing it in the middle of a minefield of conservative assholes.

Agreed. I'd much rather live in a state like California, Illinois, or New York, where progressive policies have led to low taxes, low costs of living, little corruption, and non-burdensome amounts of debt / liabilities.

Seriously a troll mod for a sarcastic retort to a real troll?

Simply replying to a troll who made a rude generalization should not be considered trolling. Especially when voltagesauceq A.) made an actual point (whether you agree or not), and B.) refrained from personally insulting the troll or anyone else.

Simply replying to a troll who made a rude generalization should not be considered trolling. Especially when voltagesauceq A.) made an actual point (whether you agree or not), and B.) refrained from personally insulting the troll or anyone else.

There's an email for moderation comments or problems. Bitching about your post being called a troll here won't help anything.

Relevant passage: "AT&T's expanded fiber plans in Austin anticipate it will be granted the same terms and conditions as Google on issues such as geographic scope of offerings, rights of way, permitting, state licenses and any investment incentives.

I assume google's contract with the City of Austin is a public record so AT&T s/b to "opt-in" as it were to exactly the same terms & conditions.

Relevant passage: "AT&T's expanded fiber plans in Austin anticipate it will be granted the same terms and conditions as Google on issues such as geographic scope of offerings, rights of way, permitting, state licenses and any investment incentives.

I assume google's contract with the City of Austin is a public record so AT&T s/b to "opt-in" as it were to exactly the same terms & conditions.

Awesome. With competition that heavy the ones who will really win will be us the consumers.

Something tells me the AT&T plan will be more nuanced (see: expensive) for the same service but will rely on bundling with cellular plans to thrive. Real question is...does AT&T think it can beat Google to the mid-2014 deadline?

Awesome. With competition that heavy the ones who will really win will be us the consumers.

Let's hope Time Warner follows their lead.

I think this is really the outcome google wanted after all, namely that it set the ball rolling with demonstration projects, then the incumbents respond. The problem will be if the incumbents limit their response to only those areas that get google fiber, or will the outcry from the rest of their customer base force the incumbents to roll out 1 gig fiber everywhere?

Something tells me the AT&T plan will be more nuanced (see: expensive) for the same service but will rely on bundling with cellular plans to thrive. Real question is...does AT&T think it can beat Google to the mid-2014 deadline?

google is starting from scratch -- AT&T has all the advantages of incumbency.

OTOH google has a head start regarding the paperwork but if AT&T can "opt-in" to the same agreement, that head start won't last long.

Something tells me the AT&T plan will be more nuanced (see: expensive) for the same service but will rely on bundling with cellular plans to thrive. Real question is...does AT&T think it can beat Google to the mid-2014 deadline?

google is starting from scratch -- AT&T has all the advantages of incumbency.

OTOH google has a head start regarding the paperwork but if AT&T can "opt-in" to the same agreement, that head start won't last long.

The headstart for AT&T can backfire if they didn't maintain the infrastructure to a certain level. I don't know how good they've been about placing capable fiber instead of copper around here.